[TONEPUB]

One other sub you might check out that works well with Magnepans is REL.  I've also had excellent luck with REL, Magnepan and ML.

[berni]

I would go with dipol subs, some great Precision devices pd 1850 18", or 2150 21" .

[rw@cn]

Rel subs work well and the Logan Grotto is a good choice for 1.7s (I haven't used it for any larger model). I also recommend the Anti-Mode 8033 sub equalizer for use with any sub woofer that doesn't have equalization built in. It is a bargain for around $400.

[klao]

Used to setup a single f-112 at 40Hz with 3.6's, I like the combinaion.   

[mgard]

I have two JL110 subs crossed over at about 35hz with a month old pair of 3.7's. I'm with Tonepub, it really puts some kick in the low end. The JL's have enough controls so you can tweak to your hearts content.

[josh358]

I have two JL110 subs crossed over at about 35hz with a month old pair of 3.7's. I'm with Tonepub, it really puts some kick in the low end. The JL's have enough controls so you can tweak to your hearts content.

Do you find that the JL has an effect on the definition of the 3.7's bass above the crossover point?

[TF1216]

Has anyone hear ever given consideration into the subwoofers from Seaton Sound?

[Rclark]

 Those look KILLER, the Seaton subs. For those more on a budget, Epik subwoofers are the same type of sub, but less expensive.

[95Dyna]

I have two JL110 subs crossed over at about 35hz with a month old pair of 3.7's. I'm with Tonepub, it really puts some kick in the low end. The JL's have enough controls so you can tweak to your hearts content.

Hi mgard,

Did you have to do much tweaking to arrive at the 35 hz crossover?  My thought was that point as well to separate it from the 40 hz extension on the Maggies so as to not interfere with anything the Maggies were providing.  That being said, do you experience any degradation of all the excellend performance you experienced when auditioning the Maggies sans subs?  I've never used a sub before so I'm wondering how the Maggies being down 3 db @ 40 hz works when crossing over to a sub that is down 1.5 in the same range.  Also, do you use the slave connection or mono out to each side?

Thanks,

Bill

[mgard]

Hi Bill,

To answer your question, I was following suggestions from Barry Diament of Soundkeepers.com. I ran across a thread on the Computer Audiophile forum of all places titled “Magnepan 3.7: I give up”. The thread is very lengthy but covers a lot of area. Barry suggested letting the Maggies do what they do best in the 40HZ and above range and cut the subs in well below so they don’t call attention to themselves. My JL’s have a 12db or 24db slope and I have chosen the 12db. My preamp, the McIntosh C2300 has three different preamp outs. So I have one set going to my MC601 mono amps driving the Magnepan 3.7’s while another set of balanced outputs are going to the mono balanced input of each JL110 sub. My biggest problem was too much bass and I had to keep dialing back the subs as it was over powering my room. Also for me the JL’s blend better and do not call attention to themselves when cut in at the lower frequency. My room size is 20’ by 18’ and it is my living room, not ideal as I have to move furniture around if I want to move the Magnepan’s out 4 to 5 foot from the front wall. I do feel that my subs add a lot of spatial information to the music not to mention low end. I have Brian Bromberg’s CD Wood in which he plays an acoustic upright bass. When the subs are on, I have a much better feeling of the acoustic space that the recording was made in.

~Mike

[mgard]

Do you find that the JL has an effect on the definition of the 3.7's bass above the crossover point?

Hi Josh,

I had the 1.7's before upgrading to the 3.7's which are less than a month old. I felt the 1.7's really need help in the low end. I also found for me in my room anyway, that the JL's called more attension to themselves when cut over above 40HZ.

~Mike

[doug s.]

while i am not familiar w/maggies, my experience w/other speakers has been that, in all cases, actively crossing them over makes them sound better, for two reasons - the speakers and their amps both work better when not subjected to seeing the lowest octave(s).  i would certainly be running an active x-over for the mains, with subwoofers.  whether the optimum x-over point would be 80hz, or 60hz or 40hz, or something else, could easily enough be determined.  a quality active x-over is way transparent enough to not negatively impact the sound of the main speakers - you will gain far more than anything you might "lose" by running the mains thru an active x-over...  (i have never heard any "veiling" from marchand x-overs...)

and in the case of active powered subs, you would simply set them at their highest x-over setting, and use the active outboard x-over cut in below.  it is likely that any quality active x-over will be far better than the built-in x-over of a powered sub anyway...

ymmv,

doug s.

[josh358]

Agree that it's often good to take a load off the main speaker's woofer. The problem with planars and stats is that adding a sub often (some say always) colors the sound, because the dynamic woofer has a very different sonic quality, the radiation pattern is different, and dipoles excite fewer room modes than omnis. So that's what I was wondering about, I might try someday to put a sub on my Tympanis, they start to roll off at about 30 Hz. Maybe I'll try it with the Martin-Logan sub I got for my MMG's, it's not big enough to add anything substantial to my Tympanis but I could get a sense if I could add it without causing more harm than good, crossed over at either 30 or 40 Hz (I've heard that the Tympanis benefit from the slightly higher crossover, for the reasons you mentioned).

[josh358]

Hi Josh,

I had the 1.7's before upgrading to the 3.7's which are less than a month old. I felt the 1.7's really need help in the low end. I also found for me in my room anyway, that the JL's called more attension to themselves when cut over above 40HZ.

~Mike

Thanks, Mike.

[doug s.]

Agree that it's often good to take a load off the main speaker's woofer. The problem with planars and stats is that adding a sub often (some say always) colors the sound, because the dynamic woofer has a very different sonic quality, the radiation pattern is different, and dipoles excite fewer room modes than omnis. So that's what I was wondering about, I might try someday to put a sub on my Tympanis, they start to roll off at about 30 Hz. Maybe I'll try it with the Martin-Logan sub I got for my MMG's, it's not big enough to add anything substantial to my Tympanis but I could get a sense if I could add it without causing more harm than good, crossed over at either 30 or 40 Hz (I've heard that the Tympanis benefit from the slightly higher crossover, for the reasons you mentioned).

you can build dipole subs, or buy them built, or buy four subs and run them back-to-back in pairs, w/the rear-facing subs out of phase, for dipole radiation pattern.

check out the build of the sub portion of the gr research super-v...

http://gr-research.com/super-v.aspx



as the complete speaker kit (w/o cabinets) retails for $2500; i am certain you can build a pair of the dipole subs (or have them built for you) for less than the cost of a pair of jl110 fathoms.  probably for even less than the price of a single fathom 110.  four 12" servo drivers, configured in dipole pairs, w/servo amplification prowided...

doug s.

[95Dyna]

Hi Bill,

To answer your question, I was following suggestions from Barry Diament of Soundkeepers.com. I ran across a thread on the Computer Audiophile forum of all places titled “Magnepan 3.7: I give up”. The thread is very lengthy but covers a lot of area. Barry suggested letting the Maggies do what they do best in the 40HZ and above range and cut the subs in well below so they don’t call attention to themselves. My JL’s have a 12db or 24db slope and I have chosen the 12db. My preamp, the McIntosh C2300 has three different preamp outs. So I have one set going to my MC601 mono amps driving the Magnepan 3.7’s while another set of balanced outputs are going to the mono balanced input of each JL110 sub. My biggest problem was too much bass and I had to keep dialing back the subs as it was over powering my room. Also for me the JL’s blend better and do not call attention to themselves when cut in at the lower frequency. My room size is 20’ by 18’ and it is my living room, not ideal as I have to move furniture around if I want to move the Magnepan’s out 4 to 5 foot from the front wall. I do feel that my subs add a lot of spatial information to the music not to mention low end. I have Brian Bromberg’s CD Wood in which he plays an acoustic upright bass. When the subs are on, I have a much better feeling of the acoustic space that the recording was made in.

~Mike

Thanks, Mike.  My situation is very similar to yours including the listening room scenario.  I have a Bryston BP26 going out to a pair of 7BSST2's the difference being you have 2 balanced outs on the 2300 and I have one which means I should probably keep the balanced connection to the amps and use a single ended pair out to the left single ended input on the F110's (this according to the JL manual to create a single ended mono connection).  Don't know what difference balanced vs. single ended makes with the subs vs. the amps

[josh358]

you can build dipole subs, or buy them built, or buy four subs and run them back-to-back in pairs, w/the rear-facing subs out of phase, for dipole radiation pattern.

check out the build of the sub portion of the gr research super-v...

http://gr-research.com/super-v.aspx



as the complete speaker kit (w/o cabinets) retails for $2500; i am certain you can build a pair of the dipole subs (or have them built for you) for less than the cost of a pair of jl110 fathoms.  probably for even less than the price of a single fathom 110.  four 12" servo drivers, configured in dipole pairs, w/servo amplification prowided...

doug s.

Thanks, I've looked at dipole subs, both the plans on the Linkwitz site and the GR Research ones. I think they'd be excellent for the smaller Maggies. Davey built a pair for his MMG's. I'm not sure that they're the best choice for crossing at 30 Hz, though. At that frequency, you should be below the lowest non-trivial room mode in almost any room, so you lose that advantage of dipoles. The radiation pattern wouldn't be right, but for single-person listening that probably doesn't matter. And you have the output advantage of an enclosure. On the other hand, I'd have enclosure resonances. In my current room, an IB arrangement might be even better, I have an attic above me so I don't have to worry about the backwave.

My main concern/question is over tonal consistency and contamination of the midbass. A high-slope digital crossover could potentially ameliorate that without introducing group delay.

[medium jim]

While there is a lot of useful technical information being brought to the table here, much is a much to do about nothing.  Bass is for the most part omni-directional and while it does radiate differently from conventional dynamic type speakers, proper integration is acheivable to the point where it is seamless.  It may take trial and error to get it right, the reward is well worth it.

Simply put, if you can identify the bass from the panels, adjust the gain on the bass amp(s) down, or relocate the sub(s), or adjust the phase or a combination of all three. 

One fault of Dipole bass is that the speakers to too high in the spectrum, bass is best on the ground as this eliminates the smear with the planars, as well as, creates a better room energy and soundstage. 

In my setup, I have the subs behind the panels and a couple feet to the outside and right on the wall.  I have the subs set at 80hz (bottom 2 octaves) and you cannot tell where the panels end and the subs begin even when  there is complicated musical passages with both uppper mid bass and with lower registers.

Jim

[doug s.]

Thanks, I've looked at dipole subs, both the plans on the Linkwitz site and the GR Research ones. I think they'd be excellent for the smaller Maggies. Davey built a pair for his MMG's. I'm not sure that they're the best choice for crossing at 30 Hz, though. At that frequency, you should be below the lowest non-trivial room mode in almost any room, so you lose that advantage of dipoles. The radiation pattern wouldn't be right, but for single-person listening that probably doesn't matter. And you have the output advantage of an enclosure. On the other hand, I'd have enclosure resonances. In my current room, an IB arrangement might be even better, I have an attic above me so I don't have to worry about the backwave.

My main concern/question is over tonal consistency and contamination of the midbass. A high-slope digital crossover could potentially ameliorate that without introducing group delay.

i'd be crossing over at 60-80hz - i'd be wery surprised actively if crossing over the maggies in the 60-80hz range did not improve them quite a bit, for the reasons i mentioned earlier.  i wouldn't worry about room modes, as dipole subs load the room in a more benign fashion, and as they're separate from the mains, you can locate them for least room interaction.  and, for the price of the fathom's, you could buy four of the gr-research iterations, and really smooth out the room modes. 

doug s.

[josh358]

While there is a lot of useful technical information being brought to the table here, much is a much to do about nothing.  Bass is for the most part omni-directional and while it does radiate differently from conventional dynamic type speakers, proper integration is acheivable to the point where it is seamless.  It may take trial and error to get it right, the reward is well worth it.

Simply put, if you can identify the bass from the panels, adjust the gain on the bass amp(s) down, or relocate the sub(s), or adjust the phase or a combination of all three. 

One fault of Dipole bass is that the speakers to too high in the spectrum, bass is best on the ground as this eliminates the smear with the planars, as well as, creates a better room energy and soundstage. 

In my setup, I have the subs behind the panels and a couple feet to the outside and right on the wall.  I have the subs set at 80hz (bottom 2 octaves) and you cannot tell where the panels end and the subs begin even when  there is complicated musical passages with both uppper mid bass and with lower registers.

Jim

I think the main problem integrating line sources with omnis is that the sound falls off at different rates, linearly for the line sources and as the square for omnis. In practice, this means that you can only adjust the bass to integrate at one distance from the speakers. But this is only a significant problem if you have theater-style seating, or habitually listen at various places around the room. For those of us who listen in the sweet spot, I don't think it's much of a problem.

Another problem is that omnis excite more room modes than dipoles. This I've found makes a big difference in just about any room. However, it isn't an issue if you're crossing over enough below the lowest non-trivial mode (that is, not mode 0, which is DC and isn't a factor in a typical leaky room).

So from my perspective it comes down to blending. There are some people who say they've never heard a dynamic woofer integrated transparently with a planar, e.g., Jonathan Valin and Wendell. (Well, me too, but they've heard a lot more combinations than I have -- I don't consider myself an authority on the topic!) So that's my concern. With the MMG's, it wasn't much of an issue for me, since they really did need some help (though I think Dawnrazor was just saying that he usually leaves his sub off for that reason). But the IVa's are good to 30 Hz or so, so a sub isn't as important.

That's as far as I can go, as you say, it's a matter of experience -- which in this case I don't have. It's not exactly pressing, anyway, I want to finish my Magnepan trip report before I start playing with the IVa's . . . then I'm going to have a lot of experimenting to do with placement, etc.